Support NeoGAF

[maharg]

You'll need hardware to get around it. The Intel Macs will have keyed hardware encryption of board/chip. You'll need a mod chip of some sort.

However, with the plethora of virtualization software out there, hardware doesn't really have to be hard anymore. Worst case scenario you run it under bochs or whatever. Mac is a very enticing target and I wouldn't be surprised to see a software solution along those lines within a year of the first boxed release of the software.

Even the PPC emulators like PearPC see selective virtualization of the PCI bus under a dedicated mini-OS as their next big step.

And on the other hand, it would probably be easier to modify one of these new macs to support Windows. The fact is, for all the people saying "this won't be an IBM PC," at the moment, IBM-style PCs and Mac PCs have a LOT in common architecturally. They both use a PCI bus, both use the same sorts of memory, and both use USB and Firewire as their primary input mechanisms. The biggest difference really IS the CPU.

 

[Hitokage]

Shogmaster: Shogmaster: Let me spell it out for you, since you still aren't getting it. PCs are GIMP. Macs are Photoshop. And by the same token, PCs are just dicking around with hardware instead of getting real work done.

*sigh* If you had taken my post as a whole you might have understood it.

 

[sprsk]

Shogmaster: Let me spell it out for you, since you still aren't getting it. PCs are GIMP. Macs are Photoshop. And by the same token, PCs are just dicking around with hardware instead of getting real work done.

no one in their right mind would ever use gimp.

 

[Hitokage]

no one in their right mind would ever use gimp.

But it's cheaper and loads images faster(or not), and in shogmaster land that's all that matters.

 

[impirius]

GIMP am cry

 

[GhaleonEB]

Streaming Quicktime of the Keynote

Didn't see it posted yet....

 

[fart]

And on the other hand, it would probably be easier to modify one of these new macs to support Windows.

you probably won't have to.

 

[maharg]

Eh, I'd fully expect them to use an odd bootload mechanism at the very least. If you expect to dual boot windows off the bat, I think you're far too hopeful.

 

[Shogmaster]

I'll have to listen for the jingle jangle of your hefty pockets. THEN IT'S POW WITH THE SOCK FULL OF PENNIES!

Jesus shit man.

He's in the Mac price range, he just spends his money on 10k bottles of Mountain Dew instead.

Dude, it took well over a year to spend that much. And it was $10,000 Candian! In 1998! That was like $500 US or something back then. :lol

But it's cheaper and loads images faster(or not), and in shogmaster land that's all that matters.

I don't think you understand Shogmaster land. Seriously. You should visit before going off the assumption deep end like that.

Shogmaster land is about spending money smart, it's not about just being cheap. If the tool's worth the money, he spends the money. For instance, for 2 years straight Shogmaster land overwelmingly passed spending bills to aquire $2500 Wacom Cintiq LCD Tablets (each year, providing enough benefits over the previous version to make it worth while). That's because each of those Cintiqs made Shogmaster much more proficient than before.

Now for Shogmaster, a computer is not a fashion statement, a lifestyle statement, nor a political statement. It's a tool. A tool to get his Painter and Photoshop running along with his Cintiq, to provide the best digital equivilent to analog drawing and painting possible. No other method known to Shogmaster land gives one this ability.

And to do this proficiently, the fanciness and appearance of the OS GUI matters little. What matters is how fast the computer is at running Painter, Photoshop, and Cintiq in unison. And for that purpose, a fast purposefully built PC is much better suited than a Mac for the reasons of more power and for less money. It's the combination of the two, not just less money (which is where you are making your false assumptions). If Macs provided solid performance advantage over PCs, like the Cintiq, Shogmaster land would have approved for the purchase of them with the premium cost over PCs. But the opposite have been true for the last 6 years: Macs while costing almost double of similarly configured PCs, still lagged behind in performance.

As for Linux, if Shogmaster land had a political agenda against "M$" and IP ownership in general, perhaps Shogmaster land would have passed bills to switch over to Linux. And if Shogmaster land was dirt poor land, and couldn't afford any of these powerful tools, then emergency bill might have been passed to gimp along with Linux distro and GIMP on a mere Graphire tablet to do his work, but fortunately, Shogmaster land has enough capital reserves to afford these tools.

BTW, anyone who states Photoshop = Macs / GIMP = PCs is someone who doesn't have a clue about the topic to contribute anything meaningful. Really. Present such a quaint and ignorant notion to Adobe's own technology evangelists like Julianne Kost and she's redicule you in public as she has done many times before at Photoshop World Conferences. All Adobe's techonolgy evangelists present and demo at places like Photoshop World Conference with PCs because they know their product runs much faster on PCs. So please, no more gimpy talk about GIMP. That's for your own good.

I doubt all this will get through to you in a single post, but it's the best I can do this late at night. I hope you enjoyed your brief glance into Shogmaster land, and come for a full stay in the future.

 

[fart]

Eh, I'd fully expect them to use an odd bootload mechanism at the very least. If you expect to dual boot windows off the bat, I think you're far too hopeful.

oh, it may be a little odd, but i'm betting you they'll make sure that hardware compatibility is aces, and bootloader issue isn't too tough (they probably have an in house bootloader that will bootstrap windows on their dev hardware right now - i imagine it won't be too long before that code is reproduced in the wild).

also, shogmaster, you're an idiot. seriously, stop posting in even slightly technical threads before you hurt yourself. no, wait

spending money smart

sorry, couldn't resist

 

[Shogmaster]

also, shogmaster, you're an idiot. seriously, stop posting in even slightly technical threads before you hurt yourself.

no, wait sorry, couldn't resist

@_o

Did you just have a brain fart or something..... fart?

 

[shantyman]

This made me laugh on C Net:

"I will never buy Apple again, ever. If this is true, I am very sad. How will I get new software for my computer?"
--John Bresnahan, CNET News.com reader

 

[AB 101]

Apple always seems to forget about AMD.

So does Dell.

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

Shog's been rather civil for the most part, that's what frightens me. I tend to re-install once a year on my machines anyway, although I abhor doing it on Windows considering how long it takes and what a comparable pain it is.

Exactly. I understand price/performance is the magic key for some people, but given that 90% of what I do is email, surf and MS Word, I'd rather have the OS that I can ignore. I use the apps, not the OS< and Windows requires too much maintenance, relative to my Mac.

 

[Shogmaster]

Exactly. I understand price/performance is the magic key for some people, but given that 90% of what I do is email, surf and MS Word, I'd rather have the OS that I can ignore. I use the apps, not the OS< and Windows requires too much maintenance, relative to my Mac.

I never said there was anything wrong with your philosophy. You found a perfect machine for your habits. It's all good. Enjoy it.

I harp on Macs for some things, but not on others. I've praised OSX plenty in the past. I especially like the fact that installing apps does not require DLL hell and is almost Palm OS like in it's tranparancy. I am a hardware whore. I'll switch software in a second if a better one comes along for my hardware. But since apps like PS and Painter run exactly the same for the end user for both platforms after the installation, what I'm not gonna do is switch to Apple just because reinstalling Windows and apps every 12 months kills few hours for that one day of the year. Also, other than that one day, I don't see what the heck I do day to day for Windows maintenace. If you have good security app like Panda or Kaspersky installed that first day, everything runs in the background for the rest of the year.

BTW, If Steve decided to grow some balls and sell OSX seperately for all X86 machines, I'd plunk down the $150 for the OS tomorrow for my workstation. It'll only cost me $150 additional for Mac version of Photoshop (Painter already comes in both forms on the disc). But the fact of the matter is, Steve is a puss, and will forever relegate Macs to 3% by keeping it all proprietary, even with Intel processors. It's MS who's got the balls by attampting to create stable OS for all the hardware variations out there. It's that proprietary nature of Macs that I hate. It's just there because they are lazy, and want to gouge on hardware to make money.

Hardware wise, I'd rather have flawed democracy of the PCs than perfect dictatorship of the Macs anyday of the week.

 

[Hurricane_Chris]

Hardware wise, I'd rather have flawed democracy of the PCs than perfect dictatorship of the Macs anyday of the week.

You are not going to get what you want. If anything, though, Apple may be indirectly doing you a favor. Microsoft and Intel had wanted to create a "uniform platform" of computers with developers for a while but haven't been able to do it. Apple will do this with their platform and Apple has gone on record as saying that they won't do anyting to stop users from buying their hardware and running Windows, or Linux or whatever on it. So you may eventually see an insanely stable version of Windows of Apple's hardware.

This may get some of the PC parts makers to do something simlar on their side which in turn may eventually get to a point where it's stable enough to get Apple to allow limited non-Apple hardware to be released (I could see for example perhaps NVidia or ATI chipset based "performance" Mac)

In the end, however, Apple is a hardware company, that's what they do. Complaining about it or hoping that they'll radically change their company focus is a waste of time. The only reason Apple messes around with software at all is so that they can sell you hardware. They make a sexy hardware package and provide powerful and simple softare that just works when you use it with their hardware.

So until that day comes either buy a MAC, or stick to the OSes that run on generic PC hardware and try to trick them out to look/act like OSX.

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

I never said there was anything wrong with your philosophy. You found a perfect machine for your habits. It's all good. Enjoy it.

...

BTW, If Steve decided to grow some balls and sell OSX seperately for all X86 machines, I'd plunk down the $150 for the OS tomorrow for my workstation. It'll only cost me $150 additional for Mac version of Photoshop (Painter already comes in both forms on the disc). But the fact of the matter is, Steve is a puss, and will forever relegate Macs to 3% by keeping it all proprietary, even with Intel processors. It's MS who's got the balls by attampting to create stable OS for all the hardware variations out there. It's that proprietary nature of Macs that I hate. It's just there because they are lazy, and want to gouge on hardware to make money.

Hardware wise, I'd rather have flawed democracy of the PCs than perfect dictatorship of the Macs anyday of the week.

It's the frequent allusions to Mac users as being more into image than function.

Re: maintenance-- I've never been able to keep my doors locked tightly enough. I try too many things, and und up with crap on the machine, and then have to clean it. The worst offenders are things I buy that come with crappy ultility software. On the mac, I can just trach that crap-- on the PC, there are several wasy for it to hide, even after an uninstall.

I agree with you re: OSX for all X86 machines, and I think it will never happen (unfiortunately).

And if I needed the power, I wouldn;t be using a Mac either. I'm hoping that the price/power ratio improves with Intel chips, but it's never going to be as cheap as cheap PCs.

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

So until that day comes either buy a MAC, or stick to the OSes that run on generic PC hardware and try to trick them out to look/act like OSX.

I could give a rats ass about the cosmetics. It's the management of the box. Adding a cosmetic layer to Windows makes that worse, not better.

 

[Hurricane_Chris]

I could give a rats ass about the cosmetics. It's the management of the box. Adding a cosmetic layer to Windows makes that worse, not better.

I don't think Shoggy cares. He said he wants the flawed democracy of the PC .... So I took that to assume that he just wanted the cosmetics of OSX not the benefits that a controlled hardware platform give to software developers. If Apple were to do as Shog suggests they'd be in the same boat as M$, in fact probably worse off because they're starting from nearly zero in supporting a multitude of devices.

Windows has to offer generic drivers, stay stable and running with driver incompatibilities under the hood, and keep chugging along even when bad 3rd party drivers (probably a huge % of the Windows problems users end up seeing) are doing nasty horrible things in the kernel's space. It's pretty darn amazing Windows works as well as it does.

Apple has managed to hack in features that M$ has been promising for a long time in LongHorn and has also managed to make fixes in a manner that is slightly more timely that M$. A big part of that is that their scope is more lmited. Even with that, I've had OSX since the beginning and each iteration has had some pretty bad bugs. Imagine if Apple had to support the HW Microsoft supports. Total chaos.

I prefer Apple software and hardware the way it is: working great but at a slightly premium cost.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Not really -- Jobs promised 3GHz G5s by LAST summer, and that didn't happen. And it has become increasingly clear that the G5 won't be showing up in any laptop any time soon.

This isn't a sudden shift in perception -- it's been building for a long time. And the laptop issue has been a HUGE problem.

Apple will not be ordering any special chips from Intel: this is the reason to do the switch, that is to get processors that are already manufactured in high volumes.

IBM dedicate only 5% of its E. Fishkill fab output for processors for Apple's systems: that is NOWHERE near enough to push for faster and faster PowerPC processors to keep the pace with Intel's systems on the long-term unless Apple wants to pay even more per CPU and that would mean more expensive Apple products or lower profit margins for Apple (both bad roads to take and Apple knows that).

It was inevitable.

 

[shantyman]

Apple will not be ordering any special chips from Intel: this is the reason to do the switch, that is to get processors that are already manufactured in high volumes.

I don't believe Apple or Intel has stated ANYTHING about what processors they will be using. All this conjecture about DRM, etc. is pointless until they say something specific. The demo was on a P4; who knows if Intel will have a special Mac variant for the new machines?

 

[Hurricane_Chris]

I don't believe Apple or Intel has stated ANYTHING about what processors they will be using. All this conjecture about DRM, etc. is pointless until they say something specific. The demo was on a P4; who knows if Intel will have a special Mac variant for the new machines?

Interestingly enough you can get a pretty good idea of what's happening by signing up to be a ADC member and getting "The Transition Documents". I was thinking maybe they'd order up something special on the die or a child die for altivec but it looks like they're just gonna just go to IA32 and regarding Altivec just straight Altivec -> SSE3.

Apple also said that they wouldn't stop anyone from running their own OS on their hardware so I expect Apple's own firmware to replace standard PC bios but be available to any software that wants to use it...while OSX will require a combination of things be present to run on a target platform.

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

Any bets on how soon we see:

A hack that will let you run OS X apps

A hack that will let you run OS X itself in some crippled fashion

A hack that will let you run OS X fine, given certain h/w requirements?

A sactioned, third-party compatible box?

 

[Panajev2001a]

I don't believe Apple or Intel has stated ANYTHING about what processors they will be using. All this conjecture about DRM, etc. is pointless until they say something specific. The demo was on a P4; who knows if Intel will have a special Mac variant for the new machines?

Ask yourself why EVERYONE says this is really only like a IMAGE loss for IBM and not an actual profit loss: the volume of chips Apple was buying (they were not buying 10x the chips they projected to sell in their machines) was SMALL for IBM. You must realize that taking about 5% of one of IBM's fabs will not put you in a good position to encourage IBM to pour tons of R&D resources available to push your new processor line miles forward at least not if you do nto want to pay IBM a big premium which Apple obviously did not want to pay.

PowerPC 970 was much farther from POWER4+ than what Intel will give Apple: either that or they will be in the SAME situation again.

 

[Zaptruder]

Apple should've started using CELL chips.

haha.

Seriously though... if Apple does some basics, like not blocking Windows use on their machines, letting some basic components be upgraded freely; graphics card within the family; so lets you upgrade to any Radeon product, ATI built or otherwise, upgrade in RAM, and upgrade HD, all easily and painlessly...

I think I'd be happy to pay the premium on Mac hardware in order to get the better aesthetic design, as well as a solid functioning, good looking OS.

Otherwise, I can see Mac owners been happy, able to run Windows.

 

[Phoenix]

I don't believe Apple or Intel has stated ANYTHING about what processors they will be using. All this conjecture about DRM, etc. is pointless until they say something specific. The demo was on a P4; who knows if Intel will have a special Mac variant for the new machines?

Actually they have already said something specific. They won't allow OSx to run on non Apple Intel platforms. This requires that there be hardware *somewhere* for the OS to be able to restrict its operations. Can't be a pure software thing as all Intel processors are the same.

 

[Zaptruder]

It's gonna be a firewire dongle.

 

[Hitokage]

Actually they have already said something specific. They won't allow OSx to run on non Apple Intel platforms. This requires that there be hardware *somewhere* for the OS to be able to restrict its operations. Can't be a pure software thing as all Intel processors are the same.

Probably a combination of BIOS and DRM signing or something.

 

[Phoenix]

Probably a combination of BIOS and DRM signing or something.

That's my guess. Macs use Open BIOS so you'll need to flash your motherboard BIOS with that to begin with. We know that Intel has Pentium DRM tech, yet have openly said that they weren't shipping that out, so that leads me to believe that OSX Intel will somehow be encrypted and the DRM chips on the special Pentium will be responsible for *FAST* on-the-fly decryption of the OS. As such you would have to have a Pentium DRM chip in order for it to work at all as doing the decryption in software would be absurdly slow even if you had the keys.

 

[ckohler]

I'm no expert on this but one big difference between x86 PCs and Macs is that Macs don't use BIOS chips. They use Open Firmware. It's my understanding (though I may be wrong) that it's a wholly different boot mechanism. That alone may keep most PCs from ever booting OSX... maybe until someone hacks it I suppose.

 

[Phoenix]

For our purposes, firmware == BIOS. The terms can be used interchangably.

 

[shantyman]

According to Macworld, the first chip being used will be the Pentium M, which jives with CNet reporting the chip would appear in Mac Minis first.

I would assume the PowerMacs will be getting dual core, probably 64 bit, but that is a safe assumption because it is nearly 2 years away befoire that is supposed to happen.

 

[AB 101]

It's MS who's got the balls by attampting to create stable OS for all the hardware variations out there.

You are quite the MS whore.


Do you really expect me to believe you would run OS X if it was available for you to run?

:lol

 

[Shogmaster]

You are quite the MS whore.


Do you really expect me to believe you would run OS X if it was available for you to run?

:lol

The only reason I stopped using Macs was because hardware got too slow compared to the PCs and I didn't want to sink my own money into something that was slower. I started off on the Mac. I learned Photoshop and Painter on the Mac at places I worked. How is it my fault that AMD and Intel took off on their CPU race and Motorola never caught up?

If I can install Tiger on my P4 Workstation right now, I'll instantly buy it! It's only $300 investment ($150ish for Tiger and another $150ish for Mac version of Photoshop upgrade since Painter 9 disc has both versions).

 

[shantyman]

I think it's funny that I bumped this thread with the Pentium 4 M info, and immediately someone else jumps in to rag on Shog.

Sorry Shog!

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

AB, believe him. Shoggy has been quite consistent on the hardware issue, and has conceded that Mac OS is less work (it's just that that work is worth it to him to have more powerful hardware).

It's a quite consistent, rational stance.

 

[shantyman]

IM, I agree. Shog has never bothered me because as you say he is consistent, and his arguments are logical. They are a far cry from the "Apple is going out of business! They suck! blah blah blah" crap we often get on this voard (any many others for that matter).

Sometimes Shog will say things to provoke Mac users. Being as defensive as we are, it hurts us emotionally I guess. Once you realize he does it for a reaction it is no big deal.

 

[Shogmaster]

Sometimes Shog will say things to provoke Mac users.

I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YER TALKING ABOUT!

 

[AB 101]

Sometimes Shog will say things to provoke Mac users.

Sometimes?

Well, I guess it could be out of jeaously of Mac OS X?